Skip to main content
Glama
microsoft

Playwright MCP Server

Official
by microsoft
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

browser_network_requests

Read-only

Retrieve a numbered list of network requests made since the page loaded. Filter by URL patterns or save to a file, then use the request number to inspect detailed data.

Instructions

Returns a numbered list of network requests since loading the page. Use browser_network_request with the number to get full details.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filterNoOnly return requests whose URL matches this regexp (e.g. "/api/.*user").
staticYesWhether to include successful static resources like images, fonts, scripts, etc. Defaults to false.
filenameNoFile name to save the network requests to. Relative file names are resolved against the workspace root. If not provided, requests are returned as text.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.0.81
    • changedInput schema / properties / filename / description
      Previous value: -"Filename to save the network requests to. If not provided, requests are returned as text."New value: +"File name to save the network requests to. Relative file names are resolved against the workspace root. If not provided, requests are returned as text."
  2. Changed6 schema fields changedv0.0.72
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • addedInput schema / properties / filename
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Filename to save the network requests to. If not provided, requests are returned as text.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / filter
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Only return requests whose URL matches this regexp (e.g. \"/api/.*user\").",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / includeStatic
      Removed value: -{
-  "default": false,
-  "description": "Whether to include successful static resources like images, fonts, scripts, etc. Defaults to false.",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / static
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Whether to include successful static resources like images, fonts, scripts, etc. Defaults to false.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedInput schema / required
      Added value: +[
+  "static"
+]
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / includeStatic
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Whether to include successful static resources like images, fonts, scripts, etc. Defaults to false.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  4. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context by noting the list is numbered and scoped to requests since page load, plus it explicitly points to the companion tool for deeper inspection. No contradiction with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences, with the core behavior first and the routing instruction second. Every sentence earns its place and there is no redundant wording.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only listing tool, the description explains what is returned, the page-load scope, and the natural next step for details. The input schema handles parameter semantics and filename behavior, so nothing essential is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents filter, static, and filename. The tool description does not add parameter-level details, but it does not need to because the schema already carries that burden.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Returns a numbered list of network requests since loading the page.' It also explicitly distinguishes the tool from its sibling browser_network_request by telling the agent to use that sibling with a number for full details.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives a clear workflow: list requests here, then call browser_network_request with the number for details. This directly tells the agent when to use this tool versus the relevant alternative.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools